Transcript XBRL Conference in Warsaw, December 2008

Proposals, Conclusions and
Dialogues
Piotr Madziar – European Commission
20 November 2009, XI European Banking
Supervisors XBRL Workshop - Vienna
Topics
• European Commission proposal for supervisory
reform
• Critics
• Next steps?
XBRL driving forces
EU Council
MS
EP
G20
Simplification
Stoiberg
XBRL
COM
Crisis
De
Larosiere
De Larosiere Reform
•
•
•
•
Financial crisis driven
Position of national regulators?
Global aspect
Commission absolute priority.
European Parliament
Resolution on Lamfalussy follow-up: future
structure of supervision (September 2008)
• Calls upon the L3 Committees to design common reporting
standards
• Multi-purpose format such as XBRL
• Throughout the EU
• Calls upon the Commission to submit adequate legislative
proposals
De Larosiere proposal
•
•
•
•
Commission’s proposal of 23 September 2009
ESRB and ESFS = ECB + ESAs + national regulators+…
Banking: colaterals, capital, fund transfer reg,…
Insurance: insurance and reinsurance, conglomerates,
institutions, Solvency II, anti money laundering,…
• Securities & Markets: transparency, markets in FI, market
abuse, prospectuses, hedge funds, CRA, take-over bids,
settlements, financial collateral arrangements, ...
• Technical standards,… XBRL?
• Links to international standard setters,… XBRL?
More powers for ESAs
•
•
•
•
•
•
Technical standards but criteria in Community legislation
Flow of information
Supervisory culture and supervisory practices
Last resort option in case of disagreement
Training programmes
Aggregate micro-prudential information from national
supervisors
• Set-up a Central European Database. The information will be
available for the relevant authorities in colleges of supervisors
and forwarded to the European Systemic Risk Council
• Technical arrangements with international organisations and
administrations of third countries.
Proposed structure for Banking
Chairperson
EBA – European
Banking Authority
Board of
Supervisors
Mgt Board
Banking Stakeholder Group
Executive
Director
€
European
Commission
ECA European
Court of
Auditors
OLAF – l’Office
européen de lutte
anti-fraude
Appeal processes
EU Council - QMV
EU Court of
First Instance
Board of Appeal for
3 ESAs
EU Court of
Justice
EBA QMV
NSA
NSA
Member State
NSA
Member State
ESFS - EU System of Financial
Supervisors
Joint Committee of European Supervisory Authorities
ESMA - European
Securities and
Markets Authority
NSA
NSA
NSA
EIOPA - European
Insurance and
Occupational
Pension Authority
NSA – National
Supervisory
Authority
NSA
College of Supervisors
EBA - European
Banking Authority
NSA
NSA
NSA
NSA
ESFS
NSA
NSA
NSA
ESRB – EU Systemic Risk Board
3rd Countries & Int’l
ECB
ESRB – European
Systemic Risk Board
ESFS – European
System of Financial
Supervision
Practicalities, Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
•
Financial assistance 37- 70 M€ in years 2011-2016
40% from the Community budget
London, Paris, Frankfurt
Status similar to EU Agency
74-90 staff (2016)
EU Staff Regulation (independence, impartiality).
Financial Market-driven regulatory
data reform
Governments
?
All
Markets
Common
Reporting
Framework
Regulated
Financial
Markets
Critics
Critics
Sovereignty
Real
arguments
Global dimension
Stop!
Exclusion and Dominance
Treasury
Critics
Real
arguments
Sovereignty of MS:
•Host states allowed to take steps if weaknesses are identified that can be abused for commercial or protectionist reasons
•ESAs empowered to override national regulators
•Changes give EU more powers. Emergency declared by the
Commission without involvement of the Council. Unclear
emergency procedure.
•MS should decide first what will ESAs do and how
Critics
Real
arguments
Global cohesion:
•Not clear how global cohesion is addressed
•Need for allignment with G-20 and Basel.
•It would be very bad for EU and its financial centres If we forge
ahead disregarding what US, Switzerland and others are doing
Critics
Real
arguments
Fiscal responsibilities of MS:
•June’s ECOFIN mandate (shoulnd’t impinge on the fiscal
responsibility of the MS) breached
•EU financial supervisory structure needs an EU fiscal
arrangement
Critics
Real
arguments
Exclusion and Dominance
•Any compromise would need to assure that host states
receive all prudential information about entire group.
•Eurozone dominance in ESRB
•Bankers dominance in ESRB, disregarding the fact that
the choice between security and price is a democratic
trade-off decision taken by governments, for the citizens.
•QMV to recognize the size and importance of financial
services relative to GDP
Options/Scenarios
Approach
Implications
Effects
Yes we can
“Political” arrangement
despite all the odds
Fast, “big bang” type of approach
Now, with the big stakes and big
appointments discussed
Yes but …
Prolonged existence of the
current L3 non-mandatory
coordination
Prolonged existence of CAN DOs
and CAN’T DOs
Until next financial crisis
Is the money spent wisely?
Substitutes: colleges? ECB role?
New revised Commission’s
proposal?
Contacts
• DG Internal Market & Services website:
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/internal_market/index_en.htm
• Piotr Madziar
+32-(0)2-2950869
[email protected]